The Latin verb terrere means: to frighten, uh-hah-hah-hah.[17] The Engwish word 'terror', just wike de French terreur, derives from dat Latin word and means from of owd: fright, awarm, anguish, (mortaw) fear, panic.

Oxford Engwish Dictionary reportedwy states dat de word 'terrorist' (French: terroriste) was invented in de year 1794, during de French Revowution. The first meaning of de word 'terrorist' was den: adherent or supporter of de Jacobins.[18] Apparent from de context given in an articwe in de Guardian, de indication 'Jacobins' in dat Oxford definition bears on de group around Maximiwien Robespierre, awso cawwed 'Montagnards', dat after 1794 were hewd responsibwe by some commentators for de repressive and viowent government over France between June 1793 and Juwy 1794, a period anawogouswy wabewed 'Reign of Terror' by commentators.[18] The given definition in Oxford Dictionary shows, de term 'terrorist' in its first use was meant as abusive term for someone's powiticaw or historicaw ideas or awwegiances, not as description of his personaw actions.[18]

In December 1795, Edmund Burke used de word "Terrorists" in a description of de new French government cawwed 'Directory':"At wengf, after a terribwe struggwe, de [Directory] Troops prevaiwed over de Citizens (…) To secure dem furder, dey have a strong corps of irreguwars, ready armed. Thousands of dose Heww-hounds cawwed Terrorists, whom dey had shut up in Prison on deir wast Revowution, as de Satewwites of Tyranny, are wet woose on de peopwe."[19]
Cwearwy, in dis case, Burke used 'Terrorists' as disparaging wabewing of armed troops hired by a government he woades.

French historian Sophie Wahnich(French) distinguishes between de revowutionary terror of de French Revowution and de terrorists of de September 11 attacks:

Revowutionary terror is not terrorism. To make a moraw eqwivawence between de Revowution's year II and September 2001 is historicaw and phiwosophicaw nonsense . . . The viowence exercised on 11 September 2001 aimed neider at eqwawity nor wiberty. Nor did de preventive war announced by de president of de United States.[20][21]

This section needs attention from an expert in Law. Pwease add a reason or a tawk parameter to dis tempwate to expwain de issue wif de section, uh-hah-hah-hah. WikiProject Law may be abwe to hewp recruit an expert.(March 2017)

U.S. American powiticaw phiwosopher Michaew Wawzer in 2002 wrote: "Terrorism is de dewiberate kiwwing of innocent peopwe, at random, in order to spread fear drough a whowe popuwation and force de hand of its powiticaw weaders".[8] This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himsewf as a "terrorist."[22] Nechayev founded de Russian terrorist group "Peopwe's Retribution" (Народная расправа) in 1869.[23]

In November 2004, a Secretary-Generaw of de United Nations report described terrorism as any act "intended to cause deaf or serious bodiwy harm to civiwians or non-combatants wif de purpose of intimidating a popuwation or compewwing a government or an internationaw organization to do or abstain from doing any act".[24] Awternativewy, responding to devewopments in modern warfare, Pauw James and Jonadan Friedman distinguish between state terrorism against non-combatants and state terrorism against combatants, incwuding 'Shock and Awe' tactics:

"Shock and Awe" as a subcategory of "rapid dominance" is de name given to massive intervention designed to strike terror into de minds of de enemy. It is a form of state-terrorism. The concept was however devewoped wong before de Second Guwf War by Harwan Uwwman as chair of a forum of retired miwitary personnew.[25]

But defining terrorism has proven controversiaw. Various wegaw systems and government agencies use different definitions of terrorism in deir nationaw wegiswation. Moreover, de internationaw community has been swow to formuwate a universawwy agreed, wegawwy binding definition of dis crime. These difficuwties arise from de fact dat de term "terrorism" is powiticawwy and emotionawwy charged.[26][27] In dis regard, Angus Martyn, briefing de Austrawian parwiament, stated,

The internationaw community has never succeeded in devewoping an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During de 1970s and 1980s, de United Nations attempts to define de term fwoundered mainwy due to differences of opinion between various members about de use of viowence in de context of confwicts over nationaw wiberation and sewf-determination, uh-hah-hah-hah.[28]

Criminaw acts intended or cawcuwated to provoke a state of terror in de pubwic, a group of persons or particuwar persons for powiticaw purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiabwe, whatever de considerations of a powiticaw, phiwosophicaw, ideowogicaw, raciaw, ednic, rewigious or any oder nature dat may be invoked to justify dem.[30]

It is not onwy individuaw agencies widin de same governmentaw apparatus dat cannot agree on a singwe definition of terrorism. Experts and oder wong-estabwished schowars in de fiewd are eqwawwy incapabwe of reaching a consensus. In de first edition of his magisteriaw survey, 'Powiticaw Terrorism: A Research Guide,' Awex Schmid devoted more dan a hundred pages to examining more dan a hundred different definitions of terrorism in an effort to discover a broadwy acceptabwe, reasonabwy comprehensive expwication of de word. Four years and a second edition water, Schmid was no cwoser to de goaw of his qwest, conceding in de first sentence of de revised vowume dat de "search for an adeqwate definition is stiww on". Wawter Laqweur despaired of defining terrorism in bof editions of his monumentaw work on de subject, maintaining dat it is neider possibwe to do so nor wordwhiwe to make de attempt.[32]

Hoffman bewieves it is possibwe to identify some key characteristics of terrorism. He proposes dat:

By distinguishing terrorists from oder types of criminaws and terrorism from oder forms of crime, we come to appreciate dat terrorism is:

inewuctabwy powiticaw in aims and motives;

viowent – or, eqwawwy important, dreatens viowence;

designed to have far-reaching psychowogicaw repercussions beyond de immediate victim or target;

conducted eider by an organization wif an identifiabwe chain of command or conspiratoriaw ceww structure (whose members wear no uniform or identifying insignia) or by individuaws or a smaww cowwection of individuaws directwy infwuenced, motivated, or inspired by de ideowogicaw aims or exampwe of some existent terrorist movement and/or its weaders;

Terrorism is defined as powiticaw viowence in an asymmetricaw confwict dat is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) drough de viowent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbows). Such acts are meant to send a message from an iwwicit cwandestine organization, uh-hah-hah-hah. The purpose of terrorism is to expwoit de media in order to achieve maximum attainabwe pubwicity as an ampwifying force muwtipwier in order to infwuence de targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm powiticaw goaws and/or desired wong-term end states.[34]

Each act of terrorism is a "performance" devised to affect many warge audiences. Terrorists awso attack nationaw symbows,[35] to show power and to attempt to shake de foundation of de country or society dey are opposed to. This may negativewy affect a government, whiwe increasing de prestige of de given terrorist group and/or ideowogy behind a terrorist act.[36]

Terrorist acts freqwentwy have a powiticaw purpose.[37] This is often where de inter-rewationship between terrorism and rewigion occurs. When a powiticaw struggwe is integrated into de framework of a rewigious or "cosmic"[38] struggwe, such as over de controw of an ancestraw homewand or howy site such as Israew and Jerusawem, faiwing in de powiticaw goaw (nationawism) becomes eqwated wif spirituaw faiwure, which, for de highwy committed, is worse dan deir own deaf or de deads of innocent civiwians.[39]

Their suffering accompwishes de terrorists' goaws of instiwwing fear, getting deir message out to an audience or oderwise satisfying de demands of deir often radicaw rewigious and powiticaw agendas.[40]

Some officiaw, governmentaw definitions of terrorism use de criterion of de iwwegitimacy or unwawfuwness of de act.[41][better source needed] to distinguish between actions audorized by a government (and dus "wawfuw") and dose of oder actors, incwuding individuaws and smaww groups. For exampwe, carrying out a strategic bombing on an enemy city, which is designed to affect civiwian support for a cause, wouwd not be considered terrorism if it were audorized by a government. This criterion is inherentwy probwematic and is not universawwy accepted,[attribution needed] because: it denies de existence of state terrorism;[42] de same act may or may not be cwassed as terrorism depending on wheder its sponsorship is traced to a "wegitimate" government; "wegitimacy" and "wawfuwness" are subjective, depending on de perspective of one government or anoder; and it diverges from de historicawwy accepted meaning and origin of de term.[43][44][45][46]

According to Awi Khan, de distinction wies uwtimatewy in a powiticaw judgment.[47]

An associated, and arguabwy more easiwy definabwe, but not eqwivawent term is viowent non-state actor.[48] The semantic scope of dis term incwudes not onwy "terrorists", but whiwe excwuding some individuaws or groups who have previouswy been described as "terrorists", and awso expwicitwy excwudes state terrorism.

U.S. president Barack Obama, commenting on de Boston Maradon bombings of Apriw 2013, decwared dat "[a]nytime bombs are used to target innocent civiwians, it is an act of terror".[49] Various commentators have pointed out de distinction between "act of terror" and "terrorism", particuwarwy when used by de White House.[50][51] 18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "internationaw terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of de Code, entitwed "Terrorism":

Invowve viowent acts or acts dangerous to human wife dat viowate federaw or state waw; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civiwian popuwation; (ii) to infwuence de powicy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect de conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primariwy outside de territoriaw jurisdiction of de U.S., or transcend nationaw boundaries in terms of de means by which dey are accompwished, de persons dey appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or de wocawe in which deir perpetrators operate or seek asywum.

On wheder particuwar terrorist acts, such as kiwwing non-combatants, can be justified as de wesser eviw in a particuwar circumstance, phiwosophers have expressed different views: whiwe, according to David Rodin, utiwitarian phiwosophers can (in deory) conceive of cases in which de eviw of terrorism is outweighed by de good dat couwd not be achieved in a wess morawwy costwy way, in practice de "harmfuw effects of undermining de convention of non-combatant immunity is dought to outweigh de goods dat may be achieved by particuwar acts of terrorism".[53] Among de non-utiwitarian phiwosophers, Michaew Wawzer argued dat terrorism can be morawwy justified in onwy one specific case: when "a nation or community faces de extreme dreat of compwete destruction and de onwy way it can preserve itsewf is by intentionawwy targeting non-combatants, den it is morawwy entitwed to do so".[53][54]

In his book Inside TerrorismBruce Hoffman offered an expwanation of why de term terrorism becomes distorted:

On one point, at weast, everyone agrees: terrorism is a pejorative term. It is a word wif intrinsicawwy negative connotations dat is generawwy appwied to one's enemies and opponents, or to dose wif whom one disagrees and wouwd oderwise prefer to ignore. 'What is cawwed terrorism,' Brian Jenkins has written, 'dus seems to depend on one's point of view. Use of de term impwies a moraw judgment; and if one party can successfuwwy attach de wabew terrorist to its opponent, den it has indirectwy persuaded oders to adopt its moraw viewpoint.' Hence de decision to caww someone or wabew some organization terrorist becomes awmost unavoidabwy subjective, depending wargewy on wheder one sympadizes wif or opposes de person/group/cause concerned. If one identifies wif de victim of de viowence, for exampwe, den de act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies wif de perpetrator, de viowent act is regarded in a more sympadetic, if not positive (or, at de worst, an ambivawent) wight; and it is not terrorism.[55][56][57]

The pejorative connotations of de word can be summed up in de aphorism, "One man's terrorist is anoder man's freedom fighter".[52] This is exempwified when a group using irreguwar miwitary medods is an awwy of a state against a mutuaw enemy, but water fawws out wif de state and starts to use dose medods against its former awwy. During Worwd War II, de Mawayan Peopwe's Anti-Japanese Army was awwied wif de British, but during de Mawayan Emergency, members of its successor (de Mawayan Races Liberation Army), were branded "terrorists" by de British.[58][59] More recentwy, Ronawd Reagan and oders in de American administration freqwentwy cawwed de mujaheddin "freedom fighters" during de Soviet–Afghan War[60] yet twenty years water, when a new generation of Afghan men were fighting against what dey perceive to be a regime instawwed by foreign powers, deir attacks were wabewwed "terrorism" by George W. Bush.[61][62][63] Groups accused of terrorism understandabwy prefer terms refwecting wegitimate miwitary or ideowogicaw action, uh-hah-hah-hah.[64][65][66] Leading terrorism researcher Professor Martin Rudner, director of de Canadian Centre of Intewwigence and Security Studies at Ottawa's Carweton University, defines "terrorist acts" as unwawfuw attacks for powiticaw or oder ideowogicaw goaws, and said:

There is de famous statement: 'One man's terrorist is anoder man's freedom fighter.' But dat is grosswy misweading. It assesses de vawidity of de cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectwy beautifuw cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardwess.[67]

Sometimes, states dat are cwose awwies, for reasons of history, cuwture and powitics, can disagree over wheder or not members of a certain organization are terrorists. For instance, for many years, some branches of de United States government refused to wabew members of de Provisionaw Irish Repubwican Army (IRA) as terrorists whiwe de IRA was using medods against one of de United States' cwosest awwies (de United Kingdom) dat de UK branded as terrorism. This was highwighted by de Quinn v. Robinson case.[76][77]

Media outwets who wish to convey impartiawity may wimit deir usage of "terrorist" and "terrorism" because dey are woosewy defined, potentiawwy controversiaw in nature, and subjective terms.[78][79]

Depending on how broadwy de term is defined, de roots and practice of terrorism can be traced at weast to de 1st-century AD.[80]Sicarii Zeawots, dough some dispute wheder de group, a radicaw offshoot of de Zeawots which was active in Judaea Province at de beginning of de 1st century AD, was in fact terrorist. According to de contemporary Jewish-Roman historian Josephus, after de Zeawotry rebewwion against Roman ruwe in Judea, when some prominent Jewish cowwaborators wif Roman ruwe were kiwwed,[81][82]Judas of Gawiwee formed a smaww and more extreme offshoot of de Zeawots, de Sicarii, in 6 AD.[83] Their terror was awso directed against Jewish "cowwaborators", incwuding tempwe priests, Sadducees, Herodians, and oder weawdy ewites.[84]

In January 1858, Itawian patriot Fewice Orsini drew dree bombs in an attempt to assassinate French Emperor Napoweon III.[86] Eight bystanders were kiwwed and 142 injured.[86] The incident pwayed a cruciaw rowe as an inspiration for de devewopment of de earwy terrorist groups.[86]

Arguabwy de first organization to utiwize modern terrorist techniqwes was de Irish Repubwican Broderhood,[87] founded in 1858 as a revowutionary Irish nationawist group[88] dat carried out attacks in Engwand.[89] The group initiated de Fenian dynamite campaign in 1881, one of de first modern terror campaigns.[90] Instead of earwier forms of terrorism based on powiticaw assassination, dis campaign used modern, timed expwosives wif de express aim of sowing fear in de very heart of metropowitan Britain, in order to achieve powiticaw gains.[91]

Anoder earwy terrorist group was Narodnaya Vowya, founded in Russia in 1878 as a revowutionary anarchist group inspired by Sergei Nechayev and "propaganda by de deed" deorist Carwo Pisacane.[80][92][93] The group devewoped ideas—such as targeted kiwwing of de 'weaders of oppression'—dat were to become de hawwmark of subseqwent viowence by smaww non-state groups, and dey were convinced dat de devewoping technowogies of de age—such as de invention of dynamite, which dey were de first anarchist group to make widespread use of[94]—enabwed dem to strike directwy and wif discrimination, uh-hah-hah-hah.[95] Modern terrorism had wargewy taken shape by de turn of de 20f century.

In earwy 1975, de Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in de United States formed de Nationaw Advisory Committee on Criminaw Justice Standards and Goaws. One of de five vowumes dat de committee wrote was titwed Disorders and Terrorism, produced by de Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under de direction of H. H. A. Cooper, Director of de Task Force staff.

The Task Force defines terrorism as "a tactic or techniqwe by means of which a viowent act or de dreat dereof is used for de prime purpose of creating overwhewming fear for coercive purposes." It cwassified disorders and terrorism into six categories:[99]

Civiw disorder – A form of cowwective viowence interfering wif de peace, security, and normaw functioning of de community.

Powiticaw terrorism – Viowent criminaw behaviour designed primariwy to generate fear in de community, or substantiaw segment of it, for powiticaw purposes.

Non-Powiticaw terrorism – Terrorism dat is not aimed at powiticaw purposes but which exhibits "conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes, but de end is individuaw or cowwective gain rader dan de achievement of a powiticaw objective."

Quasi-terrorism – The activities incidentaw to de commission of crimes of viowence dat are simiwar in form and medod to genuine terrorism but which neverdewess wack its essentiaw ingredient. It is not de main purpose of de qwasi-terrorists to induce terror in de immediate victim as in de case of genuine terrorism, but de qwasi-terrorist uses de modawities and techniqwes of de genuine terrorist and produces simiwar conseqwences and reaction, uh-hah-hah-hah.[100][101][102] For exampwe, de fweeing fewon who takes hostages is a qwasi-terrorist, whose medods are simiwar to dose of de genuine terrorist but whose purposes are qwite different.

Limited powiticaw terrorism – Genuine powiticaw terrorism is characterized by a revowutionary approach; wimited powiticaw terrorism refers to "acts of terrorism which are committed for ideowogicaw or powiticaw motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture controw of de state."

Officiaw or state terrorism – "referring to nations whose ruwe is based upon fear and oppression dat reach simiwar to terrorism or such proportions." It may awso be referred to as Structuraw Terrorism defined broadwy as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of powiticaw objectives, often as part of deir foreign powicy.

Oder sources have defined de typowogy of terrorism in different ways, for exampwe, broadwy cwassifying it into domestic terrorism and internationaw terrorism, or using categories such as vigiwante terrorism or insurgent terrorism.[103] One way de typowogy of terrorism may be defined:[104][105]

Attacks on 'cowwaborators' are used to intimidate peopwe from cooperating wif de state in order to undermine state controw. This strategy was used in Irewand, in Kenya, in Awgeria and in Cyprus during deir independence struggwes.

Abrahm suggests dat terrorist organizations do not sewect terrorism for its powiticaw effectiveness.[106] Individuaw terrorists tend to be motivated more by a desire for sociaw sowidarity wif oder members of deir organization dan by powiticaw pwatforms or strategic objectives, which are often murky and undefined.[106] Additionawwy, Michaew Mousseau shows possibwe rewationships between de type of economy widin a country and ideowogy associated wif terrorism.[107] Many terrorists have a history of domestic viowence.[108]

Some terrorists wike Timody McVeigh were motivated by revenge against a state for its actions against its citizens.

Sywvie Vermeuwen, practitioner psychoderapy,[109] suggested dat Iswamic terrorists are unconsciouswy driven by a desire of revenge for deir own circumcision.[110]

The rewationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is very compwex. Terrorism is most common in nations wif intermediate powiticaw freedom, and it is weast common in de most democratic nations.[111][112][113][114] However, one study suggests dat suicide attacks may be an exception to dis generaw ruwe.[irrewevant citation] Evidence regarding dis particuwar medod of terrorism reveaws dat every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy–a state wif a considerabwe degree of powiticaw freedom.[115][rewevant?– discuss][verify]The study suggests dat concessions awarded to terrorists during de 1980s and 1990s for suicide attacks increased deir freqwency.[exampwe needed][dubious– discuss][116] There is a connection between de existence of civiw wiberties, democratic participation and terrorism.[improper syndesis?] According to Young and Dugan, dese dings encourage terrorist groups to organize and generate terror.[117][non seqwitur]

Whiwe a democratic nation espousing civiw wiberties may cwaim a sense of higher moraw ground dan oder regimes, an act of terrorism widin such a state may cause a diwemma: wheder to maintain its civiw wiberties and dus risk being perceived as ineffective in deawing wif de probwem; or awternativewy to restrict its civiw wiberties and dus risk dewegitimizing its cwaim of supporting civiw wiberties.[122] For dis reason, homegrown terrorism has started to be seen as a greater dreat, as stated by former CIA Director Michaew Hayden, uh-hah-hah-hah.[123] This diwemma, some sociaw deorists wouwd concwude, may very weww pway into de initiaw pwans of de acting terrorist(s); namewy, to dewegitimize de state and cause a systematic shift towards anarchy via de accumuwation of negative sentiments towards de state system.[124]

Terrorist acts droughout history have been performed on rewigious grounds wif de goaw to eider spread or enforce a system of bewief, viewpoint or opinion, uh-hah-hah-hah.[126][dubious– discuss][irrewevant citation] The vawidity and scope of rewigious terrorism is wimited to an individuaw's view or a group's view or interpretation of dat bewief system's teachings.[citation needed][context?]

According to de Gwobaw Terrorism Index by de University of Marywand, Cowwege Park, rewigious extremism has overtaken nationaw separatism and become de main driver of terrorist attacks around de worwd. Since 9/11 dere has been a five-fowd increase in deads from terrorist attacks. The majority of incidents over de past severaw years can be tied to groups wif a rewigious agenda. Before 2000, it was nationawist separatist terrorist organisations such as de IRA and Chechen rebews who were behind de most attacks. The number of incidents from nationawist separatist groups has remained rewativewy stabwe in de years since whiwe rewigious extremism has grown, uh-hah-hah-hah. The prevawence of Iswamist groups in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and Syria is de main driver behind dese trends.[127]

Four of de terrorist groups dat have been most active since 2001 are Boko Haram, Aw Qaeda, de Tawiban and ISIL. These groups have been most active in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and Syria. 80% of aww deads from terrorism occurred in one of dese five countries.[127]

The perpetrators of acts of terrorism can be individuaws, groups, or states. According to some definitions, cwandestine or semi-cwandestine state actors may awso carry out terrorist acts outside de framework of a state of war. However, de most common image of terrorism is dat it is carried out by smaww and secretive cewws, highwy motivated to serve a particuwar cause and many of de most deadwy operations in recent times, such as de September 11 attacks, de London underground bombing, 2008 Mumbai attacks and de 2002 Bawi bombing were pwanned and carried out by a cwose cwiqwe, composed of cwose friends, famiwy members and oder strong sociaw networks. These groups benefited from de free fwow of information and efficient tewecommunications to succeed where oders had faiwed.[131]

Over de years, much research has been conducted to distiww a terrorist profiwe to expwain dese individuaws' actions drough deir psychowogy and socio-economic circumstances.[132] Oders, wike Roderick Hindery, have sought to discern profiwes in de propaganda tactics used by terrorists. Some security organizations designate dese groups as viowent non-state actors.[133] A 2007 study by economist Awan B. Krueger found dat terrorists were wess wikewy to come from an impoverished background (28% vs. 33%) and more wikewy to have at weast a high-schoow education (47% vs. 38%). Anoder anawysis found onwy 16% of terrorists came from impoverished famiwies, vs. 30% of mawe Pawestinians, and over 60% had gone beyond high schoow, vs. 15% of de popuwace.[134]

To avoid detection, a terrorist wiww wook, dress, and behave normawwy untiw executing de assigned mission, uh-hah-hah-hah. Some cwaim dat attempts to profiwe terrorists based on personawity, physicaw, or sociowogicaw traits are not usefuw.[135] The physicaw and behavioraw description of de terrorist couwd describe awmost any normaw person, uh-hah-hah-hah.[136] However, de majority of terrorist attacks are carried out by miwitary age men, aged 16–40.[136]

A state can sponsor terrorism by funding or harboring a terrorist group. Opinions as to which acts of viowence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism vary widewy. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, dey rarewy acknowwedge dem as such.[137][citation needed]

Civiwization is based on a cwearwy defined and widewy accepted yet often unarticuwated hierarchy. Viowence done by dose higher on de hierarchy to dose wower is nearwy awways invisibwe, dat is, unnoticed. When it is noticed, it is fuwwy rationawized. Viowence done by dose wower on de hierarchy to dose higher is undinkabwe, and when it does occur it is regarded wif shock, horror, and de fetishization of de victims.

Infant crying in Shanghai's Souf Station after de Japanese bombing, August 28, 1937.

As wif "terrorism" de concept of "state terrorism" is controversiaw.[139] The Chairman of de United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee has stated dat de Committee was conscious of 12 internationaw Conventions on de subject, and none of dem referred to State terrorism, which was not an internationaw wegaw concept. If States abused deir power, dey shouwd be judged against internationaw conventions deawing wif war crimes, internationaw human rights waw, and internationaw humanitarian waw.[140] Former United NationsSecretary-GenerawKofi Annan has said dat it is "time to set aside debates on so-cawwed 'state terrorism'. The use of force by states is awready doroughwy reguwated under internationaw waw".[141] However, he awso made cwear dat, "regardwess of de differences between governments on de qwestion of de definition of terrorism, what is cwear and what we can aww agree on is dat any dewiberate attack on innocent civiwians [or non-combatants], regardwess of one's cause, is unacceptabwe and fits into de definition of terrorism."[142]

USS Arizona (BB-39) burning during de Japanese surprise attack on Pearw Harbor, December 7, 1941.

State terrorism has been used to refer to terrorist acts committed by governmentaw agents or forces. This invowves de use of state resources empwoyed by a state's foreign powicies, such as using its miwitary to directwy perform acts of terrorism. Professor of Powiticaw Science Michaew Stohw cites de exampwes dat incwude de German bombing of London, de Japanese bombing of Pearw Harbor, de British firebombing of Dresden, and de U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima during Worwd War II. He argues dat "de use of terror tactics is common in internationaw rewations and de state has been and remains a more wikewy empwoyer of terrorism widin de internationaw system dan insurgents." He awso cites de first strike option as an exampwe of de "terror of coercive dipwomacy" as a form of dis, which howds de worwd hostage wif de impwied dreat of using nucwear weapons in "crisis management" and he argues dat de institutionawized form of terrorism has occurred as a resuwt of changes dat took pwace fowwowing Worwd War II. In dis anawysis, state terrorism exhibited as a form of foreign powicy was shaped by de presence and use of weapons of mass destruction, and de wegitimizing of such viowent behavior wed to an increasingwy accepted form of dis behavior by de state .[143][144][145]

The connection between terrorism and tourism has been widewy studied since de Luxor massacre in Egypt.[155][156] In de 1970s, de targets of terrorists were powiticians and chiefs of powice whiwe now, internationaw tourists and visitors are sewected as de main targets of attacks. The attacks on de Worwd Trade Center and de Pentagon on September 11, 2001, were de symbowic epicenter, which marked a new epoch in de use of civiw transport against de main power of de pwanet.[157][158] From dis event onwards, de spaces of weisure dat characterized de pride of West, were conceived as dangerous and frightfuw.[159][160]Maximiwiano E. Korstanje argued dat terrorism represents a diawectic of hate, between a group of insurgents whose interests have been pwaced outside de ewectoraw system and de state which is unabwe to anticipate de next bwow. Historicawwy, tourism and terrorism have inextricabwy intertwined. As enrooted in de capitawist edos, terrorism rests on de wogic of viowence and extortion, where outsiders are used to achieve de in-group's goaws.[161] Simiwarwy, Luke Howie expwains dat de actions of terrorists are not aimed at effacing entire civiwizations, as de media portrays, but in administering an extreme fear so dat deir cwaims wiww be accepted. Terrorists are usuawwy psychowogicawwy insensitive to de suffering of oders. Using extortion as a main tactic, de media ways a fertiwe ground which ampwifies de effects of terrorism on de society.[162][163][164] Likewy, one of de main probwems of terrorism seems to be de need to capture de attention of an audience. To some extent, terrorists appear to jowt de society, however, de western audience experiences a graduaw process of desensitization. This resuwt weads dese groups to innovate more cruew and viowent strategies.[165]

X-ray backscatter technowogy (AIT) machine used by de TSA to screen passengers. According to de TSA, dis is what de remote TSA agent wouwd see on deir screen, uh-hah-hah-hah.

According to a report by Dana Priest and Wiwwiam M. Arkin in The Washington Post, "Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs rewated to counterterrorism, homewand security and intewwigence in about 10,000 wocations across de United States."[176]

America's dinking on how to defeat radicaw Iswamists is spwit awong two very different schoows of dought. Repubwicans, typicawwy fowwow what is known as de Bush Doctrine, advocate de miwitary modew of taking de fight to de enemy and seeking to democratize de Middwe East. Democrats, by contrast, generawwy propose de waw enforcement modew of better cooperation wif nations and more security at home.[177] In de introduction of de U.S. Army / Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Fiewd Manuaw, Sarah Sewaww states de need for "U.S. forces to make securing de civiwian, rader dan destroying de enemy, deir top priority. The civiwian popuwation is de center of gravity—de deciding factor in de struggwe.... Civiwian deads create an extended famiwy of enemies—new insurgent recruits or informants––and erode support of de host nation, uh-hah-hah-hah." Sewaww sums up de book's key points on how to win dis battwe: "Sometimes, de more you protect your force, de wess secure you may be.... Sometimes, de more force is used, de wess effective it is.... The more successfuw de counterinsurgency is, de wess force can be used and de more risk must be accepted.... Sometimes, doing noding is de best reaction, uh-hah-hah-hah."[178] This strategy, often termed "courageous restraint," has certainwy wed to some success on de Middwe East battwefiewd, yet it faiws to address de centraw truf: de terrorists we face are mostwy homegrown, uh-hah-hah-hah.[177]

Mass media exposure may be a primary goaw of dose carrying out terrorism, to expose issues dat wouwd oderwise be ignored by de media. Some consider dis to be manipuwation and expwoitation of de media.[180]

The Internet has created a new channew for groups to spread deir messages.[181] This has created a cycwe of measures and counter measures by groups in support of and in opposition to terrorist movements. The United Nations has created its own onwine counter-terrorism resource.[182]

The mass media wiww, on occasion, censor organizations invowved in terrorism (drough sewf-restraint or reguwation) to discourage furder terrorism. However, dis may encourage organizations to perform more extreme acts of terrorism to be shown in de mass media. Conversewy James F. Pastor expwains de significant rewationship between terrorism and de media, and de underwying benefit each receives from de oder.[183]

There is awways a point at which de terrorist ceases to manipuwate de media gestawt. A point at which de viowence may weww escawate, but beyond which de terrorist has become symptomatic of de media gestawt itsewf. Terrorism as we ordinariwy understand it is innatewy media-rewated.

How terrorist groups end (n = 268): The most common ending for a terrorist group is to convert to nonviowence via negotiations (43 percent), wif most of de rest terminated by routine powicing (40 percent). Groups dat were ended by miwitary force constituted onwy 7 percent.[186]

Jones and Libicki (2008) created a wist of aww de terrorist groups dey couwd find dat were active between 1968 and 2006. They found 648. of dose, 136 spwintered and 244 were stiww active in 2006.[187] Of de ones dat ended, 43 percent converted to nonviowent powiticaw actions, wike de Irish Repubwican Army in Nordern Irewand. Law enforcement took out 40 percent. Ten percent won, uh-hah-hah-hah. Onwy 20 groups, 7 percent, were taken out by miwitary force.

Forty-two groups became warge enough to be wabewed an insurgency; 38 of dose had ended by 2006. Of dose, 47 percent converted to nonviowent powiticaw actors. Onwy 5 percent were taken out by waw enforcement. 26 percent won, uh-hah-hah-hah. 21 percent succumbed to miwitary force.[188] Jones and Libicki concwuded dat miwitary force may be necessary to deaw wif warge insurgencies but are onwy occasionawwy decisive, because de miwitary is too often seen as a bigger dreat to civiwians dan de terrorists. To avoid dat, de ruwes of engagement must be conscious of cowwateraw damage and work to minimize it.

Jones and Libicki (2008) incwudes a tabwe of 268 terrorist groups active between 1968 and 2006 wif deir status as of 2006: stiww active, spwintered, converted to nonviowence, removed by waw enforcement or miwitary, or won, uh-hah-hah-hah. (These data are not in a convenient machine-readabwe format but are avaiwabwe.)

^ abcdRobert Mackey (November 20, 2009). "Can Sowdiers Be Victims of Terrorism?". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 January 2010. Terrorism is de dewiberate kiwwing of innocent peopwe, at random, in order to spread fear drough a whowe popuwation and force de hand of its powiticaw weaders.

^Kim Campbeww (September 27, 2001). "When is 'terrorist' a subjective term?". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 11 January 2010. New York Times cowumnist Wiwwiam Safire wrote dat de word "terrorist" has its roots in de Latin terrere, which means "to frighten".

^Edmund Burke – To The Earw Fitzwiwwiam (Christmas, 1795.) In: Edmund Burke, Sewect Works of Edmund Burke, vow. 3 (Letters on a Regicide Peace) (1795). Retrieved 10 Juwy 2017.
This Internet version contains two, mingwed, indications of page numbers: one wif singwe brackets wike [260], one wif doubwe brackets wike [ [309] ]. Burke wenghtiwy introduces his view on 'dis present Directory government', and den writes on page [ [359] ]: "Those who arbitrariwy erected de new buiwding out of de owd materiaws of deir own Convention, were obwiged to send for an Army to support deir work. (…) At wengf, after a terribwe struggwe, de Troops prevaiwed over de Citizens. (…) This power is to wast as wong as de Parisians dink proper. (…) [315] To secure dem furder, dey have a strong corps of irreguwars, ready armed. Thousands of dose Heww-hounds cawwed Terrorists, whom dey had shut up in Prison on deir wast Revowution, as de Satewwites of Tyranny, are wet woose on de peopwe. (…)"

^Wahnich, Sophie (2016). In Defence of de Terror: Liberty or Deaf in de French Revowution (Reprint ed.). Verso. p. 108. ISBN978-1784782023.

^"UN Reform". United Nations. 2005-03-21. Archived from de originaw on 2007-04-27. Retrieved 2008-07-11. The second part of de report, entitwed "Freedom from Fear backs de definition of terrorism–an issue so divisive agreement on it has wong ewuded de worwd community–as any action "intended to cause deaf or serious bodiwy harm to civiwians or non-combatants wif de purpose of intimidating a popuwation or compewwing a government or an internationaw organization to do or abstain from doing any act"

^"/Iraq accuses US of state terrorism". BBC News. 2002-02-20. Retrieved 2010-01-11. Iraq has accused de United States of state terrorism amid signs dat de war of words between de two countries is heating up.

^"An unbiased wook at terrorism in Afghanistan [in 2009] reveaws dat many of dese 'terrorists' individuaws or groups were once 'freedom fighters' struggwing against de Soviets during de 1980s." (Chouvy, Pierre-Arnaud (2009). Opium: Uncovering de Powitics of de Poppy (iwwustrated, reprint ed.). Harvard University Press. p. 119. ISBN978-0-674-05134-8.)

^Sudha Ramachandran Deaf behind de wheew in IraqAsian Times, November 12, 2004, "Insurgent groups dat use suicide attacks derefore do not wike deir attacks to be described as suicide terrorism. They prefer to use terms wike "martyrdom ..."

^Awex Perry How Much to Tip de Terrorist?Time, September 26, 2005. "The Tamiw Tigers wouwd dispute dat tag, of course. Like oder guerriwwas and suicide bombers, dey prefer de term "freedom fighters".

^Theodore P. Seto The Morawity of Terrorism Incwudes a wist in The Times pubwished on Juwy 23, 1946, which were described as Jewish terrorist actions, incwuding dose waunched by Irgun, of which Begin was a weading member.

^Bruce Hoffman (June 2003). "The Logic of Suicide Terrorism". The Atwantic. Archived from de originaw on October 1, 2009. Retrieved 2010-01-11. The terrorists appear to be dewiberatewy homing in on de few remaining pwaces where Israewis dought dey couwd sociawize in peace.

^Romero, Simon (March 18, 2009). "Shining Paf". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-01-11. The Shining Paf, a faction of Peruvian miwitants, has resurfaced in de remote corners of de Andes. The war against de group, which took nearwy 70,000 wives, supposedwy ended in 2000. ... In de 1980s, de rebews were infamous for atrocities wike pwanting bombs on donkeys in crowded markets, assassinations and oder terrorist tactics.

^"1983: Car bomb in Souf Africa kiwws 16". BBC. 2005-05-20. Retrieved 2010-01-11. The outwawed anti-apardeid group de African Nationaw Congress has been bwamed for de attack ... He said de expwosion was de "biggest and ugwiest" terrorist incident since anti-government viowence began in Souf Africa 20 years ago.

^Rick Young (May 16, 2007). "PBS Frontwine: 'Spying on de Home Front'". PBS: Frontwine. Retrieved 2010-01-11. ... we and Frontwine fewt dat it was important to wook more comprehensivewy at de post-9/11 shift to prevention and de diwemma we aww now face in bawancing security and privacy.

^Ryan Lenz (February 2015). Age of de Wowf(PDF) (Report). Soudern Poverty Law Center. p. 4. Retrieved 22 March 2017. A warge number of independent studies have agreed dat since de 9/11 mass murder, more peopwe have been kiwwed in America by non-Iswamic domestic terrorists dan jihadists.

^Sean Coughwan (21 August 2006). "Fear of de unknown". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-01-11. A passenger on de fwight, Heaf Schofiewd, expwained de suspicions: "It was a return howiday fwight, fuww of peopwe in fwip-fwops and shorts. There were just two peopwe in de whowe crowd who wooked wike dey didn't bewong dere."